I'm not sure... how should an FSF respond to "will the FSF please make RMS stop beating up his wife?" it seems to be there's real politik involved and plenty of undisclosed motivations, which makes it the opposite of fairly easy. of course there are probably plenty of well-meaning people who may have signed the petition without realizing what was actually going on.

I can see that an overriding command, even from a legitimate superior in the chain of command, can be uncomfortable and undesirable, but I'm very disturbed to see that interaction misleadingly presented as a deviation from the safe space policy, and the claim that the room timing rules didn't rule applied to the safe space policy. it's like the whole point of the complaint is to distort facts and accuse rms of disregarding the safe space policy, which, leaving detailed allegations out and considering what's actually in the safe space policy, could lead to all sorts of assumptions about him, very much like reporting that julian assange was wanted in sweden for rape

do the rules state anywhere anything to the effect that a conversation with a speaker must stop just because the allotted time for a talk ran out, or is there an exaggeration that borders the malicious (not sure from which side of the border going on among those who claim he broke the rules?